Identifying analogue samples of individuals with clinically significant social anxiety: Updating and combining cutoff scores on the Social Phobia Inventory and Sheehan Disability Scale.

IF 3.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Psychological Assessment Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-20 DOI:10.1037/pas0001328
Sophie M Kudryk, Jolie T K Ho, Joshua R C Budge, David A Moscovitch
{"title":"Identifying analogue samples of individuals with clinically significant social anxiety: Updating and combining cutoff scores on the Social Phobia Inventory and Sheehan Disability Scale.","authors":"Sophie M Kudryk, Jolie T K Ho, Joshua R C Budge, David A Moscovitch","doi":"10.1037/pas0001328","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The use of analogue samples, as opposed to clinical groups, is common in mental health research, including research on social anxiety disorder (SAD). Recent observational and statistical evidence has raised doubts about the validity of current methods for establishing analogue samples of individuals with clinically significant social anxiety. Here, we used data from large community samples of clinical and nonclinical participants to determine new cutoff scores on self-report measures of social anxiety symptoms and symptom-related impairment. We then examined whether using these newly determined cutoff scores alone or in combination improves the identification of individuals who have SAD from those who do not, revealing the most ideal cutoff combination to be 34 or above on the Social Phobia Inventory and 11 or above on the Sheehan Disability Scale. Finally, we compared the effects of our new cutoff scores with old cutoff scores by extracting analogue samples of participants with high social anxiety from historical data on seven large groups of undergraduate Psychology research participants from the authors' institution spanning the past 5 years (2018-2023). We observed that the new combined cutoff scores identified markedly fewer students as having high social anxiety, lending credibility to their utility. We also observed a striking increase in levels of social anxiety symptoms in the undergraduate population from before to after the COVID-19 pandemic. Of note, most participants were under 30 and identified as Caucasian or Asian women, indicating that future research is needed to examine whether our findings generalize to diverse populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20770,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Assessment","volume":" ","pages":"513-525"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001328","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of analogue samples, as opposed to clinical groups, is common in mental health research, including research on social anxiety disorder (SAD). Recent observational and statistical evidence has raised doubts about the validity of current methods for establishing analogue samples of individuals with clinically significant social anxiety. Here, we used data from large community samples of clinical and nonclinical participants to determine new cutoff scores on self-report measures of social anxiety symptoms and symptom-related impairment. We then examined whether using these newly determined cutoff scores alone or in combination improves the identification of individuals who have SAD from those who do not, revealing the most ideal cutoff combination to be 34 or above on the Social Phobia Inventory and 11 or above on the Sheehan Disability Scale. Finally, we compared the effects of our new cutoff scores with old cutoff scores by extracting analogue samples of participants with high social anxiety from historical data on seven large groups of undergraduate Psychology research participants from the authors' institution spanning the past 5 years (2018-2023). We observed that the new combined cutoff scores identified markedly fewer students as having high social anxiety, lending credibility to their utility. We also observed a striking increase in levels of social anxiety symptoms in the undergraduate population from before to after the COVID-19 pandemic. Of note, most participants were under 30 and identified as Caucasian or Asian women, indicating that future research is needed to examine whether our findings generalize to diverse populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

确定具有临床意义的社交焦虑症患者的模拟样本:更新和合并社交恐惧症量表和希恩残疾量表的临界分数。
在心理健康研究(包括社交焦虑症(SAD)研究)中,使用模拟样本而非临床群体是很常见的。最近的观察和统计证据使人们对目前建立具有临床意义的社交焦虑症患者模拟样本的方法的有效性产生了怀疑。在此,我们利用来自大型社区临床和非临床参与者样本的数据,确定了社交焦虑症状自我报告测量和症状相关损害的新临界值。然后,我们研究了单独使用或结合使用这些新确定的临界值是否能更好地识别出患有社交焦虑症的人和未患有社交焦虑症的人,结果发现最理想的临界值组合是社交恐惧症量表上的 34 分或以上和希恩残疾量表上的 11 分或以上。最后,我们通过从作者所在机构过去 5 年(2018-2023 年)的 7 个大型心理学本科生研究参与者群体的历史数据中提取高度社交焦虑参与者的模拟样本,比较了新的临界值与旧的临界值的效果。我们观察到,新的综合临界值能识别出高度社交焦虑的学生明显减少,这使其效用更加可信。我们还观察到,从 COVID-19 大流行之前到之后,本科生群体中的社交焦虑症状水平显著增加。值得注意的是,大多数参与者的年龄都在 30 岁以下,并被认定为白种人或亚裔女性,这表明未来的研究还需要考察我们的发现是否适用于不同的人群。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychological Assessment
Psychological Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Psychological Assessment is concerned mainly with empirical research on measurement and evaluation relevant to the broad field of clinical psychology. Submissions are welcome in the areas of assessment processes and methods. Included are - clinical judgment and the application of decision-making models - paradigms derived from basic psychological research in cognition, personality–social psychology, and biological psychology - development, validation, and application of assessment instruments, observational methods, and interviews
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信